how much should I be charging for these shared appliances..

[clare]

+1, at least.

[Unquestionably Confused]

Here's the deal...

1) We don't know what the total cost to the OP is and, I suspect, neither does he.

2) Assuming there was no well to share. What would it cost each of them? A family of four using 100 gallons per person each day will pay on average $34.29 a month in Phoenix compared to $65.47 for the same amount in Boston. (pulled off the web, but some will be higher, some lower)

3) If the OP paid for the well, pump, water softener, and baseboard heat in the pressure tank room or whatever, he's got a LOT of skin in the game before the first glass of water is drawn in the neighbors condo.

4) There are three people in the neighbor's condo and one in the OP's. Are you really going to argue that their usage is equal?

5) When you consider the capital improvements just to HAVE the well, pump, water conditioner, etc. AND the monthly recurring cost for electricity and salt and then look at what the average city water bill is, that $50 is not a bad deal.

6) Finally, and where he screwed up, was he should have had the agreement reduced to writing. Period. They had an agreement. I'm not saying that it was a good agreement or a bad agreement. It doesn't appear that it was contingent upon who used what or how much the electricity costs turned out to be. It was, more or less, "If you will provide me with water, I will pay you $50/mo.)

7) Now the neighbor says "F**k you! I'm not paying anything"

They could have "agreed" at the outset for the neighbor to pay $200 a month and that's fine and had it been reduced to a contract the courts would uphold it and the neighbor would be on the hook for that amount. You can negotiate anything and you can contract to do anything. Once you do, you're liable.

[Unquestionably Confused]

Per the original post " I was willing to drop the price down, she putting up a fight. She is reneging On everything, "

Why do you say that the OP says "Tough Beans?" Even though, under the circumstances, the court will likely say that he's entitled to just that.

[clare]

In the hurry to close youcontracted to pay $50 per month for your share of the water supply expenses.

The time to do your homework was before closing the deal, not after rethinking it for 3 months. A deal is a deal. You are getting unmetered water for a fixed price, from a well and pump system you do not need to warry about - you do not need to maintain it or repair it if it fails. Any normal, reasonable water usage is worth $50 per month.

The other interesting question is what is the arrangement for sewer services? Are you on a septic system? Is it shared too? Who pays for the repairs?

Common elements of a condominium corporation, and proper reserves to pay for their maintenance is the one MAJOR thing that condominium buyers NEED to check into before purchase. Are there condo fees? What do they cover? Sounds to me that wherever you are located, the condo rules are pretty "loosey Goosey".

Condominiums can be a whole lot more headache than HOAs - for sure.

[Juan Abogado]

What happens when your neighbor or one of her guests gets sick from the well water you are effectively selling her?

Are you having the water professionally* tested periodically? (Professionally does not mean the idiot in the orange vest at HD.)

Are you taking any steps to ensure the water is safe?

Do you have business liability insurance to cover your ass?

[taxed and spent]

because the OP is not necesarily to be believed. He keeps adding stuff. And what is this "Everything" she is reneging on? There is somethign else? Hmm.

no, the court is going to look long term. $50 will be too little some day. The court will say what the documents should have - sharing actual cost.

[taxed and spent]

excellent points.

[taxed and spent]

What happens when there is a system problem at 2 in the morning?

Or when you are off on that two week cruise you are finally taking?

Man oh man.

[Unquestionably Confused]

[snip]

No, the court will look at that which is within the four corners of the contract. Unlike most liberals the court will only decide if the contract is enforceable, not decide to ensure that one party or the other benefits in some way other than originally intended.

You've heard it said by others here that on the face of it - considering the OP's stake in the game, as it were, and water rates they experience, that $50/mo for an unmetered supply of water is not unreasonable.

I get it that the neighbor no longer wishes to pay $50, but on the face of it (and I'm not reading into this as you are by calling the OP unbelievable), she hasn't made any counter offer. Given what I've said and what I'm sure than any attorney looking at the same facts (anyone raise their hand?), if he wanted to be a gigantic pr*ck, he could tell her to pound sand even if she offered him $49.50/mo.

SHE agreed to a contract price and now she doesn't want to pay it. What part of a contract do you not understand. There has been no mention of fraud or an illegal transaction which, as I see it, would be the only thing capable of voiding the contract.

Are you so dense as to believe that if you came over to my house in response to a Craigslist post for a shiny, low mileage 2012 Corvette I was selling for $55,000 and purchased it, you could demand your money back or stop paying for it four months later because a) you no longer like climbing in and out of it, or b) you grew tired of the wind in your hair? Mind you, the car is pristine, has low miles and is in perfect mechanical condition.

If so, what alternate universe do you live in?

[Unquestionably Confused]

Both are excellent points and go right back to what I opined earlier. The time for an attorney is BEFORE you act - and that goes to both the OP and the neighbor. Now that you have both pointed out other areas of liability we haven't even discussed, is $50 a month still a bad deal?

[Ed Pawlowski]

Nothing in writing though. Judge Judy would toss it out.

In the contract there should be an agreed upon maintenance or breakdown system to get it up and running if one owner is away. That would prevent a future problem. Something like: We both agree to call Bob's Pump Service and pay his bill.

[taxed and spent]

I live in the not so alternative universe where there is not only Contract Law, but Real Property Law, and things like easements, including prescriptive easements. And where judges are involved not just with remedies at law but with remedies in equity.

[taxed and spent]

Judge Judy would get a lot more facts out on the table. And probably call them both liars!

[trader_4]

I'd say the price is about the only thing we know about the contract, which was almost certainly a verbal one. I doubt she agreed to pay $50 in perpetuity. More likely they discussed sharing the cost, he said something like "How about $50 a month? And she said OK." I'm not sure that means either party is bound to that price forever. Seems more likely to me that a court would interpret that as $50 was the price as long as they were both OK with it and wanted the arrangement to continue.

Your CL one time car purchase isn't a fair analogy. A better example would be someone shows up at your door and says I can supply you with a 10 gallons of bottled water every week for $10. You say, OK. Does that mean you're locked into buying 10 gallons of water from him at $10 forever?

[trader_4]

Once again Clare is lost in space. The OP didn't contract to pay, the OP contracted to receive $50 per month for the shared water service.

We don't know what was agreed to regarding who pays for repairs, a new well, etc. Could be the OP is solely responsible, could be they agreed to split that too.

[trader_4]

Is that with or without AC? I can see that bill in peak summer. I'm in NJ here too, electric rate is 13 cents, and I'm only paying about $170 a month in summer on a 3100 sq ft house. Winter it's around that too. With no heat, no AC, it's more like $100 a month. If you're at way over $250, whatever that means, I'd say something is wrong.

There's something that's very wrong. A lawn only needs to be watered two or three times a week in summer. Running it twice a day or more? is nuts, because you want to water it deeply just once when it needs it, putting down about 1/2". If you're watering in lightly several times every day, each time you're wasting water wetting the grass, getting it started, instead of watering it fully once. Also it should be timed to end about 6AM, so you're watering it when evaporation will be lowest.

Why didn't you take her up on the Killawatt type idea? You probably can't use a Killawatt because the pump is likely

240V, but as Ed pointed out, you can get meters for $100 that will measure it. Seems she had a somewhat reasonable idea. Could have said, OK we'll meter it for 3 months, you pay for half the cost of the meter set up. Then you'd have some real numbers instead of totally winging it. How is a lawyer going to figure out what a fair split should be? He knows less than the two of you. Lawyers are real good at running up bills in situations like this.

And who set up this nutty thing in a condo to begin with? The well should have been part of the common property, common expenses.

[trader_4]

If it is, then what does it say? What's spelled out in the master deeds and bylaws is extremely important.

I actually use

Like I said before, sprinkler system running for a lawn twice or more a day, something is very wrong there. Should be putting down ~1" of water total a week, dividing it up in 2 or 3 waterings. Does your neighbor have anything to say about that? If I saw you watering inappropriately like a madman, I might be wondering how much of the well expense is for that.

[trader_4]

I thought that her offer to somehow meter the electric usage, whether temporarily to get some numbers for a few months or permanently, at least showed the neighbor wasn't being a total ass. It sounds less expensive than starting a legal war.....

[trader_4]

That assumes that you do the work yourself. I agree, you or I could do it cheaply. But..... This is a multi unit condo and I'm not sure that in NJ you can do your own electrical/plumbing work that requires a permit in that case. Especially when you have a hostile neighbor. So, in this case, even if he has the skills, it's probably a job for a pro. Still, when the neighbor suggested the Killawatt idea, I would have looked into a metering solution that would fix the whole thing, asked her if she was willing to pay half the cost of the work, etc...... That might have made the $50 look better.

Also, OP just posted for the first time something about the condo legal documents covering this? What's up with that? That would seem to be the most relevant thing at this point, what it says about this.

[trader_4]

+1

The problem would seem to be that developing real numbers that are acceptable isn't a cheap or easy thing.